Discussion for article #223474
It’s a horrible ethical quandary because (at least in the case of the mitochondrial defect) we know that the alternative is unsafe – the unaltered offspring will almost certainly have a much shorter life with much more pain and less appreciation of pleasure. And being able to avoid that – even at some other costs – would be a good thing.
On the other hand, once the technology is available, you pretty much know that it will be used stupidly. And, in the global-resource view, this is a lot of money and talent to spend just so that a tiny number of people can have genetic children (yeah, that ship has sailed, I know.)